stylemog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> sell-side research associates do have a more
> applicable skillset than IBD analysts to equity
> long-short and fundamental research driven HFs
> (not even talking about distressed or event driven
> where there are clear benefits to having banking
> exposure)... but the IB analysts still tend to
> place a little better at these funds.
yes
>
> it simply has to do with the perceived value of
> candidates coming out of IBD analyst programs.
this is true -- and for better or for worse, perception is almost as good as reality as far as recruiters are concerned.
> where do the most ambitious, hardest-working kids
> head to straight out of undergrad? IB. you could
> argue trading... but its definitely not research.
coming out of college, i thought i would make a career as a sell-side analyst or eventually move to portfolio management, because public equity is all i knew and really cared about at that time. i also wasn't aware of all the potential exit opportunities coming from banking. even after having received a couple of BB banking offers, my focus was pretty set on doing research so i was finding all the reasons why i *shouldn't* be doing banking. but if i could do it all over again and if i had known that i'd be interested in other things besides public equity, the outcome might have been different.
> part of it is due to the fact that SS research at
> many firms don't recruit actively out of
> undergrad... but in general, it's not most
> undergrad's #1 choice.
it's true that SS research doesn't actively recruit out of undergrad, but the rest of the story has to do with the fact that college kids seem to be less aware of equity research than investment banking.
that being said, while it's true that your exit opportunities coming out of a BB investment banking program are superior than pretty much any other field (with the exception of big-3 consulting, perhaps), a lot of times the perceived barriers to entry into other industries are not necessarily what they appear to be. part of the reason why i think so many people find it hard to make non-traditional transitions (such as equity research to private equity, for example) is because in their mind, they feel like it's impossible to make that move because they didn't come from banking. and while it's true that it's hard, it's not impossible, and easier than you might believe if you know how to position yourself.
in other words, if you're persistent and dedicated enough to forge your own exit opportunities, you can get things done. besides, it's not like banking and research are completely different animals -- there is some overlap in terms of analysis, modeling, etc.
i can see how this thread might quickly evolve into the debates about the merits and de-merits of banking versus research....but the reality is, even though you may not have nearly as many exit opps coming out of a two year banking analyst program vs. research, you could probably do a lot worse than having a gig in sell-side research. in fact, as far as exit opportunities to capital management/buy side roles are concerned, i would say that research is still the next best exit to these opportunities (second only to banking).